• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Lord of the Rings TV series

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,278
...

They are projecting their own story on Galadriel. The problem is Galadriel in LoTR was never a hypermasculine supremacist person to begin with. ...

So them making Galadriel a hypermasculine smug brute just to tell men that they should evolve like her too is a bit of hijacking the original character for one's own ends.

There's one Elven character that actually fits the bill in the movies, which is Thranduil the Elven King. Galadriel in Rings of Power currently resembles him more than the movie-Galadriel in terms of closedmindedness, smugness and impulsivity.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies - Thranduil and Tauriel Alternate Ending HD
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,278
...

So them making Galadriel a hypermasculine smug brute just to tell men that they should evolve like her too is a bit of hijacking the original character for one's own ends.

Normie GIVES UP On Rings of Power After CRINGE Galadriel Horse Scene - by Eat Garbage
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
47,745
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Episode 4

The positive:
  • All the various plotlines except the Harfoots one made a decent bit or two of progress.
  • Nice cinematography
  • A familiar magical device makes its appearance

The negative:


At least the episode had some momentum. But I'm kind of surprised for all the money they pumped into the show that (1) the writing is not better and (2) the choreography is not better and/or more believable. Like, for this amount of money, you should NOT be having "logic bloops" in the plotting, it should all have been hammered out by the writing team ahead of time with all the prep they supposedly did. There's so much of the plotting that ends up feeling "less than" and/or laughable.

Also, with all these adaptations coming out, I think one question that I now constantly have is, "Okay, we got THIS -- but what could we have had instead?" Like, sometimes something seems average/okay in these adaptations until you think about what they could have done otherwise, and then there's some disappointment over what didn't happen. This is one of those shows ("This is what we got?"). [She-Hulk is starting to feel like another.] Or, while I understand the point of The Matrix Resurrections was supposed to be subversive (and I have a soft spot for it), we could have had a really great action film making up for past problems and taking things to another level. Basically something that could have been kick-ass. For RoP, the direction taken feels inexplicable... again leading to questioning why they decided to brand this as a Tolkien property (and the only reason I see is for the marketing).

Still finding it amusing as fan fic and curious about where it is going.
 
Last edited:

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,278
:unsure:

1663447293337.png
 

The Cat

I'm from Outer Space...Dont Overthink it.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
18,925
you know when I see things like this(series and the controversy that seems to circle them like albatross), I cant help but wonder how much of it is because of too many cooks from the sidelines. Eg: those more shall we say toxic "fans" who take issue with strange things, and the execs who fear losing the money those "fans" "might" bring? Do you ever wonder that?
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
47,745
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
you know when I see things like this(series and the controversy that seems to circle them like albatross), I cant help but wonder how much of it is because of too many cooks from the sidelines. Eg: those more shall we say toxic "fans" who take issue with strange things, and the execs who fear losing the money those "fans" "might" bring? Do you ever wonder that?

The whole thing is confusing to me. Like, this series actually is generating the kinds of tensions you are talking about, audaciously.

They marketed this as a "Tolkien" series yet without anything that is even trying to make the show seem like an actual adaptation. it literally is only a loose lift of Tolkien and seems to be more like, "Oh wow, we're free to just take random elements of Tolkien and create the world AND the plot wholesale!" Like, they don't give a shit about doing Tolkien, they just wanted to use elements of Middle-Earth and brand it as Middle-Earth to get viewers and LotR fans, IMO.

I think it would have been more respectable if they had been really up front about what the show actually was and/or even just created their own world with rip-offs of Tolkien elements (without breaking copyright -- kind of like Bright did), and then they could just be taken at face value. Instead, creating a show that insists it is based in Tolkien is going to create all these expectations that are not going to be met, because they didn't even really bother to try to meet them in the first place.

Either that, or they could have actually bothered to make it more better emulate the actual characters and places being used. I think this is a legitimate criticism regarding approach.

Meanwhile, It's been kind of an average show, with some amusing gaffs / idiosyncrasies so far.

I don't know how Amazon signed off on this, aside from signing off on Wheel of Time which I assume was worse. Like, they spent a LOT of money on this but it sounds like they didn't know what they were getting (which I have trouble believing) or just marketed it however they wanted without caring if it was honest.

The racists and misogynists are just another separate issue, it's all creating a bunch of noise deflecting from actual responsible criticism of the show. This is just becoming more and more common. This, She-Hulk, Ms Marvel, other shows nowadays. Everyone is trying to get in on things, and meanwhile they need more content creators and many seem relatively untested but handed large properties. Many of them also seem to view this as a change to "adjust" the homogenous nature of many franchises (which I don't have a problem with) -- but they seem to be lacking in writing skills and real imagination, even when the acting talent and the technical elements of the shows are decent. Literally every time it's the writers and showrunners who are the weakest links.

I finished watching The Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies today with my kid, and I said after, "You know, the one good thing about Rings of Power is that it makes Jackson's The Hobbit trilogy look a lot better." Which is hilarious. At least Jackson TRIED to adapt the actual book. We might argue about how much of it was extraneous and didn't need to be there, or any alterations he made, but the third film actually adheres more or less to the book aside from all the added/changed things in the final battle and that moron Alfred as well. It hits many of the emotional beats, even though it tries too hard to wed itself to LotR.
 

The Cat

I'm from Outer Space...Dont Overthink it.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
18,925
The whole thing is confusing to me. Like, this series actually is generating the kinds of tensions you are talking about, audaciously.

They marketed this as a "Tolkien" series yet without anything that is even trying to make the show seem like an actual adaptation. it literally is only a loose lift of Tolkien and seems to be more like, "Oh wow, we're free to just take random elements of Tolkien and create the world AND the plot wholesale!" Like, they don't give a shit about doing Tolkien, they just wanted to use elements of Middle-Earth and brand it as Middle-Earth to get viewers and LotR fans, IMO.

I think it would have been more respectable if they had been really up front about what the show actually was and/or even just created their own world with rip-offs of Tolkien elements (without breaking copyright -- kind of like Bright did), and then they could just be taken at face value. Instead, creating a show that insists it is based in Tolkien is going to create all these expectations that are not going to be met, because they didn't even really bother to try to meet them in the first place.

Either that, or they could have actually bothered to make it more better emulate the actual characters and places being used. I think this is a legitimate criticism regarding approach.

Meanwhile, It's been kind of an average show, with some amusing gaffs / idiosyncrasies so far.

I don't know how Amazon signed off on this, aside from signing off on Wheel of Time which I assume was worse. Like, they spent a LOT of money on this but it sounds like they didn't know what they were getting (which I have trouble believing) or just marketed it however they wanted without caring if it was honest.

The racists and misogynists are just another separate issue, it's all creating a bunch of noise deflecting from actual responsible criticism of the show. This is just becoming more and more common. This, She-Hulk, Ms Marvel, other shows nowadays. Everyone is trying to get in on things, and meanwhile they need more content creators and many seem relatively untested but handed large properties. Many of them also seem to view this as a change to "adjust" the homogenous nature of many franchises (which I don't have a problem with) -- but they seem to be lacking in writing skills and real imagination, even when the acting talent and the technical elements of the shows are decent. Literally every time it's the writers and showrunners who are the weakest links.

I finished watching The Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies today with my kid, and I said after, "You know, the one good thing about Rings of Power is that it makes Jackson's The Hobbit trilogy look a lot better." Which is hilarious. At least Jackson TRIED to adapt the actual book. We might argue about how much of it was extraneous and didn't need to be there, or any alterations he made, but the third film actually adheres more or less to the book aside from all the added/changed things in the final battle and that moron Alfred as well. It hits many of the emotional beats, even though it tries too hard to wed itself to LotR.


I noticed a lot of books and subject authorities on writing and getting published back when I was in college was based on making books feel like movies....to which I used to ask, why make books that read like movies and movies that are billed like books, wont that sort of...degrade one while eroding another?
 

MaxMad244

Active member
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
240
MBTI Type
INTJ
Could you imagine of someone made a movie about the Wheel of Time and called it "The Many Wheels of Time-Space Continuums, the Adventures of Jack Bean."

I feel like this show is nice to watch but a total defecation on the original work. I'm not picking on the producers, look how Disney turned Marvel into a cast of Goofballs.

Defecation is just part of being in Hollywood. I mean jesus christ they gave an Emmy to that rando for a movie about teenagers so far removed from reality its a parity of itself - pure comedy.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
47,745
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I noticed a lot of books and subject authorities on writing and getting published back when I was in college was based on making books feel like movies....to which I used to ask, why make books that read like movies and movies that are billed like books, wont that sort of...degrade one while eroding another?
It depends, I guess.

I suppose if your goal is to GET PUBLISHED, then marketing works that allow for easy adaptation from one medium to another is a huge plus. It's a large selling point, because you probably won't get a lot of money for selling a book but damn if you can sell movie rights and maybe even bag adapting your own script, well, there's a big budget for you to tap into.

But I agree with the structure thing. There are things you can do in film that you can't do easily in books and vice versa, so you are necessarily trading off the strength of your own medium to conform to the shape of another. I guess it depends on your overall goal. Sometimes when I am writing, I automatically think, "How would they adapt this in a film? Are the effects replicable easily?" And so on. But then it's like putting your cart before the horse.

Defecation is just part of being in Hollywood. I mean jesus christ they gave an Emmy to that rando for a movie about teenagers so far removed from reality its a parity of itself - pure comedy.
Well, the Emmy is a TV show award, not a film award. And it's a parody, I guess you're saying. But it's making it hard for me to decipher which film -- or TV show, I'm not sure -- that you are talking about. Which one is it? Heck, though, there's probably a number to choose from lol.

It's all necessary evil shit nowadays, if you want published. Gone are the days when you'd slave away on paper in your home and get a book published with a direct line. Everything is noise, and writers spend a lot of their time getting agents and also marketing their work more than they do writing. You have to have the right in's and know the right people. It's all a business. So it's not a surprise to see a lot of the issues that commonly occur, if it's about business and not about writing or quality of work per se. Even if you write the most fucking awesome book, if they don't know how to sell it, no one will pick it up aside as a small labor of love (if you are fortunate). Writers are expected to pitch their ideas and/or have someone pitch their ideas for them.
 
Last edited:

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,278
Amazon Faces HUGE DISASTER As Rings Of Power CRASHES In Ratings! - by JosiahRises
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
47,745
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
man, some actual discussion criticism would be nice, not all the crappy political-slanted vids.

I'd rather have a balrog puts its head up my keister.
 

Vendrah

Never-retiring Millenial
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
1,871
MBTI Type
NP
Enneagram
952
man, some actual discussion criticism would be nice, not all the crappy political-slanted vids.

I'd rather have a balrog puts its head up my keister.
Maybe I should get back to the thread?
Even though my opinions on stuff like this are kinda simplistic, yours is more sophisticated.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
47,745
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Maybe I should get back to the thread?
Even though my opinions on stuff like this are kinda simplistic, yours is more sophisticated.
Any discussion by people who actually have watched it, critical or accepting, is preferable than just a bunch of rant vids. I mean, my opinion is mixed myself, my big criticism is mostly that it's not really a Tolkien adaptation, it's mainly fan fic that borrows elements from Tolkien. And then it's a little too high-concept for me and doesn't really quite come to life.

Overall I probably won't rewatch it. I guess I realize one of my personal litmus tests of whether I really like something is whether I find rewatches valuable. This show is about on par with Stranger Things for me (although Season 4 of ST actually had legitimately rewatchable moments in it).
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,278
If Amazon had managed to produce this abomination on a low budget, it could've become a cult classic.
 
Top